Ferguson Out until 2022

[BurleyBaggie]

Nathan Ferguson crocked until 2022 with an Achilles injury. 

Mentioned before my missus is from down that way and has connections to Palace. There is a prevailing view he might not make a professional career out of it.

[HLS]

A shame for the lad, but right now I just hope we get the money we're owed without the hindsight bullshit.

[sickParrot]

A real shame, ive been told he was up there with Pereira in terms of talent.

[MassDebater]

Shame for the lad, but as HLS said our only concern should be the valuation. At this rate they'll decide that in about 2036!

[SW4Baggie]

It's my understanding the valuation has to be set at the time he moves, there is absolutely no reason to take into account the injury issues he's subsequently had since moving... it's not like an a transfer fee is reduced if a player arrives and then gets injured.

We agreed a £10m fee with Palace, they highlighted an injury concern and asked the player to have surgery - which we advised against - to rectify it.

The fee we receive should reflect his value at the time of the move, whether he's since turned into a total crock should have absolutely no bearing on what we now receive.

It's a shame for the lad, but can't help feel had he listened to the advice of the medical staff that had supported him through previous injuries and knew his body far better than the ones who'd hastily completed a medical at Palace he may not be where he is now.

[Ministry Of Silly Signings]

A shame for the lad, but right now I just hope we get the money we're owed without the hindsight bullshit.

As long as we get our money for him, and he doesn`t try to sue us years later, ( didn`t Captain Mardon do that ? ), then don`t care where he ends up, Kiddy Harriers maybe ?

[MassDebater]

It's my understanding the valuation has to be set at the time he moves, there is absolutely no reason to take into account the injury issues he's subsequently had since moving... it's not like an a transfer fee is reduced if a player arrives and then gets injured.

We agreed a £10m fee with Palace, they highlighted an injury concern and asked the player to have surgery - which we advised against - to rectify it.

The fee we receive should reflect his value at the time of the move, whether he's since turned into a total crock should have absolutely no bearing on what we now receive.

It's a shame for the lad, but can't help feel had he listened to the advice of the medical staff that had supported him through previous injuries and knew his body far better than the ones who'd hastily completed a medical at Palace he may not be where he is now.

Hope you are correct, however as we've seen with some retrospective decisions in the Prem, they certainly don't go in our favour... Also, didn't he fail a medical which was why the original move failed?

[MassDebater]

It's my understanding the valuation has to be set at the time he moves, there is absolutely no reason to take into account the injury issues he's subsequently had since moving... it's not like an a transfer fee is reduced if a player arrives and then gets injured.

We agreed a £10m fee with Palace, they highlighted an injury concern and asked the player to have surgery - which we advised against - to rectify it.

The fee we receive should reflect his value at the time of the move, whether he's since turned into a total crock should have absolutely no bearing on what we now receive.

It's a shame for the lad, but can't help feel had he listened to the advice of the medical staff that had supported him through previous injuries and knew his body far better than the ones who'd hastily completed a medical at Palace he may not be where he is now.

Hope you are correct, however as we've seen with some retrospective decisions in the Prem, they certainly don't go in our favour... Also, didn't he fail a medical which was why the original move failed?

[MassDebater]

It's my understanding the valuation has to be set at the time he moves, there is absolutely no reason to take into account the injury issues he's subsequently had since moving... it's not like an a transfer fee is reduced if a player arrives and then gets injured.

We agreed a £10m fee with Palace, they highlighted an injury concern and asked the player to have surgery - which we advised against - to rectify it.

The fee we receive should reflect his value at the time of the move, whether he's since turned into a total crock should have absolutely no bearing on what we now receive.

It's a shame for the lad, but can't help feel had he listened to the advice of the medical staff that had supported him through previous injuries and knew his body far better than the ones who'd hastily completed a medical at Palace he may not be where he is now.

Hope you are correct, however as we've seen with some retrospective decisions in the Prem, they certainly don't go in our favour... Also, didn't he fail a medical which was why the original move failed?

[MassDebater]

It's my understanding the valuation has to be set at the time he moves, there is absolutely no reason to take into account the injury issues he's subsequently had since moving... it's not like an a transfer fee is reduced if a player arrives and then gets injured.

We agreed a £10m fee with Palace, they highlighted an injury concern and asked the player to have surgery - which we advised against - to rectify it.

The fee we receive should reflect his value at the time of the move, whether he's since turned into a total crock should have absolutely no bearing on what we now receive.

It's a shame for the lad, but can't help feel had he listened to the advice of the medical staff that had supported him through previous injuries and knew his body far better than the ones who'd hastily completed a medical at Palace he may not be where he is now.

Hope you are correct, however as we've seen with some retrospective decisions in the Prem, they certainly don't go in our favour... Also, didn't he fail a medical which was why the original move failed?